Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middletown tables one reclassification, approves others amid questions about labor-management process
Summary
Commissioners tabled an Equal Opportunity and Diversity Specialist reclassification for further HR review, approved most other job reclassifications from ASPE and UPSU reviews, and heard concerns about manager involvement and tracking repeat employee requests; fiscal impacts for the presented packages were discussed.
At a special July 25 meeting, Middletown’s General Counsel Commission tabled the Equal Opportunity and Diversity Specialist job description at the request of a department director and proceeded to consider a slate of other labor-management reclassifications resulting from ASPE and union review processes.
A department director asked that the diversity-specialist job description be returned to HR for a full professional re-evaluation and for an evaluation matrix to be shared; the commission voted to table that single position to allow further work with HR and the union. "I'm going to ask you guys to table this job description and send it back to HR for reevaluation," the director told the commission.
Director Richardson presented an executive summary of the labor-management process, describing the Maximus scoring rubric and the five-member review panel (two union representatives, two management representatives and a neutral). Richardson provided fiscal-impact figures: one ASPE labor-management package showed a fiscal-year impact of $61,692.80 (including retroactive pay), and the UPSU package totaled $24,835.20 for the fiscal year.
Union leadership spoke in support of the process and the positions moving forward. Greg, identifying himself as UPSU Local 6457 president, said the committee followed the collective-bargaining agreement process, interviewed each candidate and voted positions forward for review.
Commissioners raised concerns about a potential conflict where a direct supervisor had signed off on an employee’s application and also participated in interviews or committee votes. Several members said best practice would be for a manager to recuse from steps where a direct supervisory relationship could influence outcomes.
Most positions in the packet were approved in separate roll-call actions at the meeting; the recycling and sustainability coordinator measure passed with recorded opposition (the transcript records the vote result as three in favor, two opposed). Commissioners agreed to receive more complete chapter copies and manager/union versions of the job descriptions as the revision process continues; staff said they aim to finish manager-level review and get materials to unions by mid-August.
The commission closed labor-management business by asking staff for better tracking of repeat reclassification requests and for consideration of a more directed process (rather than a lottery) so employees who have worked out of class repeatedly are not repeatedly deferred by chance.
Next steps: the tabled diversity-specialist position will return to the commission after HR and the director reconcile the evaluation matrix; other approved reclassifications will be forwarded to the full council in individual resolutions as required by the collective bargaining agreement.
